18

CHAPTER II

AGRARIAN PROBLEMS IN KERALA 1934 – 1971: THE PHASE OF ANTI–FEUDAL STRUGGLES

Prior to the linguistic reorganization of states in independent India, Kerala

was constituted of the princely states of Travancore and Cochin and the region of

Malabar. Malabar was part of the Madras presidency. The caste system in the

form of social organization in India was known for its extreme rigidity in Kerala.1

The caste system in Kerala was much more oppressive than in other parts of the

country.2 The economic basis of this rigid caste system has been the complex

hierarchical system of land tenure in which upper castes were also the upper

classes.3 Before the formation of the state of Kerala, the tenurial conditions that

prevailed were different in the three regions; however the tenurial insecurity and

1 Balakrishnan, P.K. Jathivyavasthayum Keralacharitravum (Mal.), p.349, DC Books, Kottayyam, 2008. 2 Dhanagare, D.N, Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p.57, Oxford Universty Press, New Delhi, 1994. 3 Ibid. p.57.

19

deprivation were uniform throughout Kerala. The ruling king made grants of land

to the Brahmins for the maintenance of temples and religious institutions. They

had made land allotments to Rajas and Nair Chieftains who had a military

obligation to the king to protect his territory with their retainers.4

The lands thus originally granted by the kings to the Brahmins constituted

the Janmam right (the birth right). But it has been noted that prior to the British

there was no concept of private ownership in the absolute European sense. Thus

prior to the British, Jenmis, the land owning class were not considered as having

absolute ownership over their land. 5 Before the advent of British, the Jenmis

did not have the power for arbitrary evictions and rack renting. It has been

pointed out that even Charles Turner the British official accepted this fact that

there was some form of right to occupancy in Malabar.6

The second type of landownership next in hierarchy was Kanam.

According to Logan, the word Kanam was derived from the Malayalam word

‘Kanuka’ meaning ‘to see.’7 Thus according to him initially the Kanamdars were

supervisors who collected the revenue for Jenmis. In practice, Kanam was a

tenure whereby the tenant offered a sum to the Jenmis either as security or as

advance rent, in return for the land leased out for a specific period. Only very few

of the Kanamdars cultivated the land with family labour. Most of them either used

4 Dhanagare, D.N, Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p.58, Oxford Universty Press, New Delhi, 1994. 5 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.6, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993. 6 Namboodiripad, E.M.S. History, Society and Land Relations, p.152, Left Word, New Delhi, 2010. 7 Logan, William. Malabar Manual (Mal.), p.371, Mathrubhumi Books, Kozhikode, 2007.

20

to sublet the land to Verumpattomdars or they used to hire labourers to cultivate

the land.8 There were different types of Kanam like Kuzhikkanam Pattam,

Kuzhikkanam, Kanam Kuzhikkanam and Kuttikkanam. Kuzhikkanam was

intended for bringing improvements and bringing waste land into cultivation.9

But there was also a practice called Melkanam or Melcharthu, which

referred to the issuing of second Kanam in favour of the first Kanamdar or a third

person when the Jenmi wanted to raise the money collected as the security for

the land.10 Travancore Melkanam turned out to be a wide spread measure of

oppression as every Melcharthu resulted in an upward revision of rent which

affected the already penurious peasant.11

But the most numerous among the land owners were the

Verumpattomdars who held the land as a simple lease from the Kanamdars

without any advance of money.12 It usually ran for not more than a single year.

The Verumpattomdars paid the whole estimated net produce to the landlord

deducting the bare cost of seed and cultivation, forcing him into a hand to mouth

8 Dhanagare D N, Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p.58, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994. 9 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.6, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993. 10 Ibid, p.7. 11 Panikkar,K.N.(Ed.), Peasant Protests and Revolts in Malabar, p.xi, Indian Council for Historical Research and People’s Publishing House, New Delhi, 1990. 12 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.7, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993.

21

existence.13 Even within Malabar, the land tenure system had regional

differences. In case of Verumpattom, the Verumpattomdars of Northern Malabar

occupied land for Kezhupattom. It extended for a longer period of time like 5 to

12 years, than the Verumpattom of Southern Malabar.14 Verumpattomdars

occupied the lowest position in the hierarchy of land tenure system and they

constituted the majority of the tenants.

Caste-Class Linkages in the Land Tenurial System.

The Jenmis who were in possession of land let the land out for cultivation

to Kanamdars who in turn transferred it to the Verumpattomdars. Jenmis were

invariably upper caste and the Kanamdars belonged to either of the middle

castes or upper castes. The lower castes mainly Pulayas and Cherumas were

reduced to the status of semi- agrestic slaves and they constituted the labour

force, on which the agrarian economy of Kerala survived. They had to lead a very

miserable life with the caste oppression, slavery and surplus extraction rendering

them oppressed in multiple ways.15 These castes were tied to the land with no

rights to freely exchange the labour. The Slavery Abolition Act of November I843

brought about some changes in the conditions of these section of the society.16

13 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.7, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993. 14 Karat, Prakash. Malabarile Karshika Bandhangal: Oru Padhanam(Mal.), p.12, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 2005. 15 Balakrishnan, P. K. Jati Vyavastayum Kerala Charithravum (Mal.), p.348-351, DC Books, Kottayam, 1997.

16 Dhanagare, D. N. “Agrarian Conflict, Religion and Politics: The Moplah Rebellions in Malabar in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries,” Past and Present, No. 74, (Feb., 1977), pp. 112-141 Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society.

22

History has it that this system prevailed in Kerala society in 1930s also.17 What

prevailed was the Jati Jenmi Naduvazhi Medhavittam, (caste landlord-

chieftainship), as pointed out by EMS. It was the domination of Upper caste and

landowning feudal chieftains. According to him, the social domination by upper

castes through the hierarchical caste system, the economic domination by the

upper classes through the Jenmi system and the political control enjoyed by the

upper castes through the Naduvazhitham and the combination of these systems

represented the Jati Jenmi Naduvazhi Medhavitham. 18

The Agrarian Conditions in Malabar.

This land tenure system survived for a long time across Kerala with more

or less the same pattern. But Travancore and Cochin witnessed tenancy reforms

like legislations guaranteeing right to occupancy by 1850s. Malabar as part of

the Madras presidency, was under the rule of the British, and had to bear the

brunt of brutal colonial exploitation. According to the social customs prevalent at

that time the Jenmis were not supposed to depart with the Janmam right over

land. It was held as sacrosanct and it was not supposed to be sold in the market.

The land relations were mainly guided by the force of customs than by the legal

enforcement. But as time passed these relations have changed to the extent

that just before Mysorean invasion, janmam right was freely available as a

17 Prabhatham, 14th November 1938. 18 Nambuthirippadu, E.M.S. Keralacharitram Marxist Veekshanathil(Mal), p36, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 1997.

23

commodity to be sold and bought in the land market.19 The first shocks to this

system in Malabar came from the Mysorean invasion20 which brought some large

scale changes in the social structure of the then society and consequently on the

land tenure system.

The Mysorean rulers introduced a land tax which as noted by historians,

encroached upon the customary shares of the Jenmis and Kanamdars, leaving

the share of Verumpattomdars intact.21 At the time of the Mysorean invasion,

many of the landowners belonging to the upper castes mainly Nambuthiris and

Nairs had to flee from the area to the princely states of Cochin and Travancore.22

The flight of the landlords made the position of Kanakkars relatively better as

they started to enjoy rights over the lands earlier under the ownership of the

Jenmis. The Mysorean rulers were forced to settle the tax directly with

Kanamdars who were mainly Mappilas as the land owning class fled the area.23

Yet it has been noted that the consciousness that the land belongs to the one

who works on it had not developed among the Kanakkars as they have never

claimed Janmam (ownership) rights over the land.24 By virtue of the

19 Dhanagare, D. N. Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p.59, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994. 20 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.3, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993. 21 Dhanagare, D. N. Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p.60, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994. 22 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.3, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid.

24

Sreerangapattanam agreement, Tippu Sultan had to cede the province of

Malabar to the British in the year of 1792.25 The British dominance in Malabar

brought big changes to the prevailing situation as the former Jenmis started to

return with the intention of reasserting their lost Janmam rights.26

The East India Company which had received the help of the Hindu

aristocracy in fighting Tippu decided in favour of the Jenmis who wanted to

reclaim their possessions. Only incursions by Kanamdars before 11 September

1787 were approved.27 This generated apprehensions in the minds of

Kanamdars who were mainly Mappilas. The East India Company was eager in

settling the disputes as the situation on the ground was deteriorating and was

getting more chaotic. They also required the help of the Hindu chieftains and

aristocrats in the third Anglo Mysore war. So the East India Company decided to

accept the Jenmis as the absolute owners of land.28 This had profound

implications as far as the land relations in Malabar were concerned. The Ernad

Taluk witnessed Mappila peasants’ unrest as early as 1800.29

The period 1836 -1919, witnessed a series of rebellious outbreaks among

the Mappilas of Malabar. These rebellious outbreaks could not take an organized

form and they were easily curbed by the British forces. Most of these outbreaks

25 Panikkar, K.N. Malabar Kalapam Prabhuthvathinum Rajavazhchaykkunmethire(Mal.), p.18, D C Books, Kottayam, 2006. 26 Ibid. p.19. 27 Wood, Conrad. The Moplah Rebellion and Its Genesis, p.101, Peoples Publishing House, New Delhi, 1987. 28 Ibid. 29 Ibid, p.108.

25

were in the form of Mappila peasants forming bands, killing landlords and looting

their homes. It should be noted that the main participants in the struggle were the

Mappilas who were Kanamdars and Verumpattomdars.30 The fixation of

landownership as absolute and giving Jenmi sole right over the Janmam land

resulted in the peasantry getting more and more impoverished. The defeat of

Tippu and the subsequent British land settlement policies in Malabar, leading to

the restoration of the social and economic position of the dominant castes,

severely affected the position of the Mappilas in South Malabar.31 In order to

comprehend the land tenure system in Malabar, there is a need to look at the

efforts by the British authorities to understand the tenurial system of Malabar.

The Jenmis reasserted their rights over the land and started a tightened

process of extraction of surplus with the full backing of the coercive instruments

of the state. The first such outbreak occurred in 1836 and between 1836 and

1854; there were more than 22 outbreaks. These outbreaks usually had a similar

pattern. It involved a group of Mappila peasants attacking a Brahmin Jenmi or a

Nair official, and looting the properties and destroying and defiling temples. All

these riots were suppressed with iron fist as all the rebels who used to take

refuge in some mosque or temple were shot dead by the police.32

30 Panikkar, K.N. Malabar Kalapam Prabhuthvathinum Rajavazhchaykkunmethire (Mal.), p.102, D C Books, Kottayam, 2006. 31 Hardgrave, L. Robert. “The Mappilla Rebellion, 1921: Peasant Revolt in Malabar,” Modern Asian Studies, Vol.11, No. 1, (1977), pp. 57-99 ,Cambridge University Press. 32 Dhanagare, D. N. Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p.61, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994.

26

After several outbreaks, the government of Madras appointed T L

Strange,33 a special commissioner34 to inquire into the causes of the Mappila

disturbances and the role played by the Thangal of Thirurangadi. The officer was

also to examine the relation between land lords and tenants and finally to

suggest whether any redefinition of the land rights is required in I852. But the

commissioner’s enquiry could not identify the problems suffered by the

peasantry. On the other hand, it identified, ‘the Mappila tenantry’s proneness to

evade their obligation and to resort to false and litigious pleas.’35 The

commissioner observed that the legal provision of eviction was being abused; but

concluded that the ‘growing networks of the religious priests and mosques had

fomented the evil and was the root cause of the Mappila outbreaks.’ The report

recommended further oppression of the Mappilas.36

In 1875, after receiving an anonymous petition from the name of Mappila

youths, Thiyyas and other communities, the govt. of Madras responded by

appointing William Logan, the then District Magistrate of Malabar, to enquire into

the question of land tenure and tenant’s rights.37 The government of Madras in

the year 1881 appointed William Logan, a special commission, to report upon: (1)

33 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.17, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993 34 Radhakrishnan, P. Peasant Struggle, Land Reforms and Social Change, p.45, Sage Publications, New Delhi, 1989. 35. Dhanagare, D. N. Agrarian Conflict, Religion and Politics: The Moplah Rebellions in Malabar in the Nineteenth,and Early Twentieth Centuries, Past and Present, No. 74, (Feb., 1977), pp. 112-141 Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society. 36 Dhanagare, D.N. Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p.63, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994. 37 Kurup, K.K.N. William Logan: Malabarile Karshika Bandhangalil Oru Patanam(Mal.), p.18, State Institute of Languages, Thiruvananthapuram, 1991.

27

The question of the tenure of the land and of tenant rights in Malabar and the

alleged insufficiency of compensation offered by landlords and award for

improvement made by the tenants; (2) The question of sites for mosques and

burial grounds with suggestions for a measure of rendering the grant of such

sites compulsory under certain conditions.38 For Logan, Janmam right was

originally a political office which enjoyed a definite customary share of produce.

He interpreted “Kanam” as the right to supervise and protect and receive a share

of the net produce of the soil for this duty. According to Logan, the Kanakaran

enjoyed a stable right as the Jenmi. The Jenmi could not evict him at his will.

Logan criticized the theory that the Kanamdars were simple mortgagors and the

Jenmi had absolute right over land.39

Logan found that the renewal system resulted in the Verumpattomdars

being rack rented and reduced to impoverishment. Logan stated that the

“cultivating class is rapidly degenerating into a state of insolvent Cottierism.”40

Logan was extremely critical of the judicial practice of transforming the

Verumpattom into a mere lease hold running for a single year. The Sadar court

judgement in 1856, ruled that at the end year the land lord had the liberty either

to renew the lease or let the land to another tenant. In the same vein, a judgment

from the district court of South Malabar in 1878 held that a tenant had no right to

38 Logan, William. Malabar Manual (Mal.), p.365, Mathrubhumi Books, K, 2007. 39 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.31, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993. 40 Ibid. p.21.

28

claim remission of payment to the landlord.41 William Logan through his enquiry

revealed the life of penury and misery led by the peasantry. The peasantry who

were a low status group lived under constant suppression by the landlord who

wielded extra constitutional powers like excommunication if they ever revolted

against his authoritarian exercise of power. Logan made a strong plea for

ensuring security of tenure to the actual cultivator to reduce the insecurity and

misery suffered by the Kanakkars and Verumpattomdars. He was also indignant

at the growing number of eviction suits. He emphasized the need for adequate

compensation for the evicted tenants.

The sensible recommendations of Logan were safely buried by the

government as it appointed another Malabar Land tenure Committee in 1885 with

some non-official members to represent the interest of Jenmi land lords, the

Kanamdars and also Verumpattomdars.42 The committee arrived at a vague

consensus regarding draft legislation for compensation on eviction for the

improvement of the land by the tenants. The Mappila cultivators were struggling

to make both ends meet. The British land policy implemented hastily and

without making a proper analysis of the ground realities, seriously affected the

agrarian social structure of Malabar.43 By 1910, the population and pressure of

land increased further and evictions, rack renting, excessive lease renewal fees

41 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.17, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993. 42 Dhanagare, D. N. “Agrarian Conflict, Religion and Politics: The Moplah Rebellions in Malabar in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries,” Past and Present, No. 74, (Feb., 1977), pp. 112-141, Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society. 43 Dhanagare, D. N. Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p61, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994

29

and poor compensation for tenant’s improvements reached its acme and left the

peasantry in a penurious condition. The Mappilas of southern Taluks were worst

hit by the oppression of Jenmi land lords.44

The Indian National Congress started establishing its link in Malabar

around 1915. It was the Home Rule movement which first generated political

activism in Malabar45 which was followed by the first Malabar district conference,

in May 1916 held at Palghat.46 But the Congress was dominated by Jenmis and

their lawyers. The conference never bothered to address the issues of tenants.47

It was noted that there was a constant re-iteration of the proprietary claims of the

Malabar landlords to the virtual exclusion of even reference to the tenantry. The

conference, could not estimate the peasant unrest and it was unable to

sympathize with the cause of the peasants as it chose to blatantly condemn, the

isolated incidents of revolts.48

There were some attempts to organize the tenants by the new generation

of tenants who got the benefit of modern education. Malabar Kudiyan Sangham,

(Tenants Association) formed in 1920 was one among them.49 What the Kudiyan

44 Ibid. p.75. 45 Menon, K.P. Kesava. Kazhinjakaalam(.Mal.), p.58, Mathrubhumi, Calicut, 2009. 46 Dhanagare, D. N. Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p.78, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994. 47 Ibid. p.77. 48 Ibid. 49 Kutty, K.Gopalan. “Malabar Kalapavum Deseeya Prastanavum” (Mal.), Malabar Kalapam Charithravum Pratyasastravum, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram. p.20, Thiruvananthapuram, 1991.

30

Sangham wanted was a comprehensive legislation giving the right of occupancy

and fair rent to tenants, abolishing Melcharthu and granting the right to purchase

homesteads.50 Their organizations were mainly led by the rich tenants whose

interests were at variance with the Verumpattomdars and agricultural labourers.

With all the avenues closed, it was natural for their anger to flow out and Khilafat/

Non Co-operation movement provided the outlet.51 The Moplah peasants were

forced to revolt because of the exploitative tax system of the British. The

oppressive activities of the Jenmis majority of whom were Hindus, under the seal

of British authority also resulted in arousing the anguish of the Moplah

peasants.52 The officials of the system wanted an excessive revenue tax from the

tenants. Majority of the peasants were unable to meet the huge tax demand.

Then the Jenmis and the colonial administrators used police and courts to

intimidate the poor peasants.

The Malabar Peasant Revolts -1921

The Khilafat movement found strong support among the Mappilas and

their overwhelming support to the agitation could be ascribed to nothing but the

overwhelming nature of oppression they were subjected to.53 As the movement

50 Kunhikrishnan, V.V. Tenancy Legislation in Malabar (1880-1970), p.55, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993 51 Dhanagare, D. N. Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p78, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994. 52 Ganesh, K. N. Keralathinte Innalekal(Mal), p.253, Department of Cultural Publication, Government of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram, 1997. 53 Tharakan, P.K.Michel. “Malabar Kalapam: Puthan Anwesanangalkoru Mugavura”(Mal.) in Malabar Kalapam Charitravum Prathyasasthravum, p.39-40, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 1991.

31

acquired momentum, the government banned Khilafat meetings and arrested the

leaders. This made the Mappilas grow more defiant. The leadership of the

movement was shifted to the grassroots and the movement turned into violent

insurrection against the administration and landlord. The peasants wanted to put

an end to the exploitation by the landlords and colonial officials. The non

cooperation and Khilafat movement gave a spark to the peasantry and that led to

the rebellion Known as Malabar rebellion or Mappila rebellion. The early attitude

of Congress leaders was changed and they criticized the participants of this

rebellion. These created a gulf between the national movement and Mappila

peasants in Malabar.54

After a major event in Pookkottoor village, the rebellion started in earnest

in 1921 August, when there was a wide spread rumour that army had raided

Mambrath Mosque when in fact it had gone to arrest the leaders of agitation.

There were clashes between the police and protesters and police opened fire,

which set off a spiral of violence resulting in looting, arson, burning of

government buildings, railway lines and post offices. By the end of August, the

whole interior of southern Malabar was under the control of rebels. The rebellion

could be suppressed only by the end of December 1921. According to official

sources, 2,337 rebels had been killed and 1,652 were wounded and 45,404

surrendered. But the unofficial sources say that there was a death toll of more

54 Panikkar, K.N. Malabar Kalapam Prabhuthvathinum Rajavazhchaykkumethire(Mal.), p.139, D C Books, Kottayam, 2006.

32

than 10,000 ordinary people.55 There It was clearly not an act of fanatics as

alleged by the colonial establishment and official historians of the time.56 The

vast majority of the rebels were poor peasants prompted by their plight to fight for

their rights. The religious turn which it took, helped the land lords and

administration to disregard it as fanaticism as rebels had the Khilafat as the

immediate reason for agitation.

As K.N. Panikkar states, “The Pattern of rebel proceedings underlined a

consciousness primarily rooted in an opposition to the landlords and the colonial

state. The evolution of this consciousness was a process in 1830s which had

begun in the early years of British rule and developed through the experience of

a series of conflicts in the 19th century. The memory of these conflicts,

transmitted through a powerful oral tradition was a vital element in the growth of

peasant consciousness expressed finally and powerfully in the rebellion of 1921

against Lord and State.”57 Dhanagare notes that, “the ardour for a cause as

expressed by the willingness to kill or be killed does not suffice to make a

successful peasant revolution.”58

55 Menon, K.P. Kesava. Kazhinjakalam (Mal.), p.100, Mathrubhumi Books, Kozhikode, 2009. 56 Panikkar, K.N. Malabar Kalapam Prabhuthvathinum Rajavazhchaykkunmethire (Mal.), p.103, D C Books, Kottayam, 2006. 57 Panikkar, K.N. Against Lord and State: Religion and Peasant Uprising in Malabar, 1836-1921, p.199, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1989. 58 Dhanagare, D. N. Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, p.82, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1994.

33

After the withdrawal of the Non-Cooperation movement and Khilafat, the

province of the Malabar fell into political doldrums for around 10 years. The brutal

suppression of the movements, by the British authorities, the complete lack of

initiative on the part of the INC led to the political activism being at its low end.

The Mappila rebellion failed to achieve its goals and invited suppression by the

state machinery in the absence of a class consciousness transcending the

barriers of caste and religion. At some point, if took the form of attack against

other religions and religious institutions. Though landlordism and oppression was

the central point, the movement could not take up any comprehensive fight

against landlordism or could not achieve a unity of the whole tenants,

Kanamdars, Verumpattomdars and agricultural labourers.

Congress Socialist Party and Karshaka Sangham

From the beginning of the 20th century, the ideas of socialism and

Marxism began to make their appearance in Kerala, Swadeshabhimani

Ramkrishnapillai, the pioneering journalist, wrote a biography of Marx in 1912.59

After the great October Revolution, Kerala Society witnessed the spread of

socialist ideology. The national movement for freedom struggle could also not

remain free from the influence of socialist ideas. An increasingly larger number of

Congress activists started to acquire socialist leanings and they were not happy

with the pace and the path through which the national movement advanced. The

withdrawal of Non Cooperation movement led to the disillusionment of many left

leaning congress activists and many of them started exploring alternative ways to

59 Namboodiripad, E.M.S. Kerala Society and Politics, p.106, National Book Centre, New Delhi, 1984.

34

liberate the country from colonial shackles. This was not an isolated experience

of Kerala, but part of the larger experience of national movement across the

country. The contacts which developed between the political activists like EMS

Namboodiripad who were imprisoned in the Vellore jail for Civil Disobedience

movement with the accused of the Lahore conspiracy helped in the emergence

of a revolutionary consciousness in them.

The suspension of Civil Disobedience movement had resulted in

widespread disillusionment in the minds of the left leaning congress activists of

Malabar.60 Many of them who spent their life in prison came into contact with

revolutionaries from North India who were inmates of the prisons in which they

were imprisoned. After coming out of the prison they started working actively

towards the spread of socialist ideas. In 1931 Communist League was started by

a group of young nationalists like NC Sekhar in Travancore. They started active

deliberations about the possibility and the necessity of organizing peasants and

agricultural labourers to fight against landlordism and colonialism. In 1933 itself

Valluvanadu Nikuthi Dayaka Sangham was formed. In 1934, at Pattambi there

was a meeting of the peasants where NG Ranga also participated. Shortly

thereafter, a Kerala Karshaka Sangham was formed with EMS as the President

and C K Govindan Nair as secretary.61 In the same year Communist Party of

India was banned and the newspapers and literature of the communists were

60 Kurup, M.N. AV Kunjambu(Mal.), p.78, Prathibha Books, Mavelikkara, 2000. 61Karat,Prakash. Malabarile Karshika Bandhangal: Oru padhanam(Mal), p.60, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 2005.

35

seized by Colonial government due to the report of the Statesman on the

activities of the CPI.62

Congress socialist party was formed in Patna with Jayaprakash Narayan

as its Secretary and EMS joint Secretary.63 The first conference of the Party was

conducted in Bombay which made reverberation in the political scenario of

Kerala.64 Before this, in May 1934 CSP was formed in Kerala.65 A meeting was

held in Calicut for this purpose with K Kelappan in the chair and a committee of

seven was appointed for propaganda and to draw up a programme. P Krishna

Pillai was chosen as secretary and C K Govindan Nair as president.66 The

formation of Congress Socialist Party was a significant milestone which brought a

paradigm shift in the Kerala society. The congress socialist party had decided to

organize the people through mobilizing them into various mass organisations.

Under the auspices of the Congress Socialist Party, a conference was

held at Calicut in 1935. K A Keraleeyan presented a comprehensive programme

of work and it was accepted by all members. The important aspects of the

conference was its emphasis on the struggle for increase in workers' wages and

reduction in working hours along with propaganda among workers on the nature

62 Mazumdar, Aurobindo. Indian Press and Freedom Struggle 1937-42, Orient Logman, Delhi, 1993, p. 228. 63 Pillai, P. Krishna. ‘Kerala Congress Socialist Party’, Prabhatham, 10 April, 1939. 64 Nambuthiripad, E.M.S. Kerala Society and Politics, p.146, National Book Centre, New Delhi, 1984. 65 The Hindu, 14th May1934. 66 Karat, Prakash. “The Peasant Movement in Malabar, 1934-40,” Social Scientist, Vol. 5, No. 2, (Sep., 1976), pp. 30-44.

36

of capitalist-state collaboration and repression. The congress socialists started

organizing the working class and the workers of the various factories and fields.

The conference also decided to initiate the setting up of Yuvajana sanghs

(youth leagues) and clubs and propagating through them the idea of full

independence and the course of struggle to achieve it. Even before this

conference, there were youth movements organised in various parts of Malabar

like the Abhinav Bharath Yuva Sangh by AV Kunhambu at Karivellur in April 13,

1934. AV Kunjmabu, encouraged by P Krishnapillai started a Samyukta

Karshaka sangham at Karivellor on September 1935. AV Kunhambu took special

care to use the energy of Abhinav Bharata Yuvak Sangh to the promotion of

Karshaka Sangham.67

The Bala Bharatha Sangham of Karivellur gave a lot of assistance to the

Karshaka Sangham. It was a movement of the children. The organisation helped

the Karshaka Sangham in spreading the information regarding the activities of

the Sangham across the village.68 The children organised Deshiya Balasangham

under the leadership of EK Nayanar at Kallyassery. The students were also

getting into the mode of agitation and organisation. The Travancore student

association was formed in 1937 and the Calicut student’s union was also started

at the same time. The first attempt to bring all the students of Kerala under the

banner of an all India student movement, the All India Students’

Federation(AISF), which was formed in 1936 was initiated. With this aim the first

67 Kuruppu, M.N. A.V. Kunjambu (Mal.), p.86, Prathibha Books, Mavelikkara, 2000. 68 Prabhatham, 19th December 1938.

37

all Kerala student conference was held at Calicut in Samoothiri College in the

year 1937.69 The conference also decided to work for removing ministerialists

and other moderates and making Congress into a real people's organization.

Opposing imperialist-inspired wars and making all efforts to strengthen the anti-

imperialist struggle to gain independence was another declared aim of the

conference.70

The most significant decision taken by the Conference of 1935 was the

launching of a movement of peasants based on demands for abolition of

landlordism, removal of indebtedness and for the improvement of the working

conditions of agricultural labourers. It has been observed that the conditions of

peasantry in Malabar were comparatively much worse than those of Travancore.

As KKN Kurup notes, “In Travancore and Cochin, the native feudalistic

governments introduced certain agrarian legislations in the second half of the

nineteenth century to fulfill the requirements of fixity of tenure, fair rent and free

transfer and thereby facilitate capital investments in coffee and tea plantations by

the European capitalists and joint stock companies. These legislations and their

amendments and the subsequent legislations like the Nair Regulations against

the matrilineal system, a feudal institution, in the long-run weakened the

traditional feudal class and landlordism.”71 But Malabar presented a contrasting

69 Bhaskaran, C. Student movement in Kerala, p.14, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 1998 70 Karat, Prakash. The Peasant Movement in Malabar, 1934-40 Social Scientist, Vol.5, No 2, (Sep., 1976), pp. 30-44. 71 Kurup, K.K.N. “Peasantry and the Anti-Imperialist Struggles in Kerala,” Social Scientist,Vol.16, No.9, (Sep.,1988), pp. 35-45.

38

picture with ryots still struggling to make both ends meet. The Great Economic

Depression made things worse. Compounded with Great Economic Depression,

the scarcity of essential commodities made the situation explosive.

The Adimathozhilali Sanghatana72 (The Association of Agrestic Slaves)

was formed at the instance of Karshaka sangham in Chirakkal taluk. A public

meeting was held on 1st November 1938 at Kakkara presided by M Kunjiraman

Nambiar. The agrestic slaves from Prappoil, Tirumeni, Chorappova, Njarampa,

Eriyam participated in the conference. The meeting asserted the need for the

agrestic slaves to come together and work towards the emancipation to achieve

the right to work. All the agrestic slave laborers joined the organisation and a

working committee was formed.73 The Beedi workers of Malabar also started

organizing themselves demanding higher emoluments.74

It was decided to organize Karshakasangham in every village in the

district to safeguard the interests of the agriculturists and bring their hardship to

the notice of the government. A committee was formed for the purpose. K A

Keraleeyan, a young political activist was deputed by CSP to form an

organization of the peasants as they were not properly mobilized. In the words of

Vishnu Bharatheeyan: “After completing our jail terms we all came out of our

homes after initial rest of one or two weeks. Two decisions had already been

72 The agrestic slaves were those who were sold by Jenmis to others for forced labour and they generally belonged to castes like Vettuvar, Maavilar and Karimpalar. See Prabhatham, 1938, November 14, Pustakam 1, lakkam 31 73 Prabhatham, 14th November, 1938. 74 Prabhatham, 2nd January, 1939.

39

taken at the jail itself. One among them was to go to the houses of the isolated

unorganized peasantry to bring them into a larger movement.”75

According to Bharatheeyan “the first meeting of the Karshaka Sangham

took place in his own home at Kolachery in Kannur and it was attended by 28

persons and a 11 member working committee was elected. The meeting elected

KA Keraleeyan as the Secretary and Vishnu Bharatheeyan as the President.”76 It

was the first attempt of its kind to form peasant organisations and the Kolachery

Karshaka Sangham became the pioneer in the organisation of the peasantry.77

The movement had twin enemies to fight, landlordism and colonialism assisting

each other.78

The formation of All India Kisan Sabha added a new vigour to the

movement. As early as 1936, April 11, Kisan organization of different provinces

of India had participated in a convention which adopted a resolution to fight for

securing complete economic emancipation of the peasantry and the achievement

of full economic and political power for the peasants and workers and all other

exploited classes.79 The All India Kisan Congress stood for the abolition of

75 Bharatheeyan, Vishnu. Adimakalengane Udamakalaye (Mal.), p.72, Prabhatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 1980. 76 Ibid. p.81. 77 Aisha, R. History of Karshaka Sangham, p.73, Unpublished Ph D Thesis, University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram. 2004. 78 Bharatheeyan, Vishnu. Adimakalengane Udamakalaye (Mal.), p.81,Prabhatham, Thiruvananthapuram,

1980.

79 Sudhakar, Trivenisarma. Swami Sahajanantha Saraswathi (Mal.), p.14, Prabatham, Thiruvananthapuram,2008.

40

various types of landlordisms like Zamindari, Talukdari, Malguzari, Estemardari,

Khote, Jenmi and Inamdari80 that prevailed across the country.

But there were a lot of problems which had to be overcome. The Karshaka

Sangham had to adopt techniques to drive home the idea of social

transformation through political action to the hearts of peasantry. There was

widespread fear in the back ground of the reign of terror after the Malabar

rebellions. The farmers, bound by customs and conventions, were hesitant to

challenge the land lords. To mobilize the peasantry and energize them, the

Jathas or processions were organized by the leaders of Karshaka Sanghams.

Marching songs trumpeting radical slogans became the captivating force of the

Jathas which has helped the ryots develop a strong sense of collectivity and

togetherness. These Jathas performed many functions other than simply

articulating the immediate interests of the peasants. The class consciousness

which is inherent in the industrial working class is lesser in the peasantry. These

demonstrations will help to make them aware of their interests.81 The songs

were also of great help in simplifying to a certain extent the political messages

which the Sangham wanted to drive home.

Prabhatham

The year 1935 witnessed the Congress Socialist Party starting the

80 Rasul, M.A. A History of the All India Kisan Sabha, p.6, National Book Agency Private Ltd, Kolkata, 1989.

81 Prabhatam, 31st October 1938.

41

publication of Prabhatham, the official organ of Congress Socialist Party,

published as a weekly, under the editorship of EMS Namboodiripad from

Shorannur on 9 January 1935. At that time, Congress Socialist was the central

organ of the CSP in all India level. 82 Prabhatham stood against the injustice and

atrocities by the feudal oppressors and had therefore to bear the brunt of

persecution. As it also spread the ideology of socialism it had to face the strict

scrutiny by the government. The editor, EMS, was summoned and warned

because of an article appeared in the Paper.83 After these events the

Government fined the paper for the publication of a poem, ‘Athmanadam’ (voice

of the soul)84 written by Chovvara Parameswaran and this fine was beyond the

power of the management of Prabhatham to remit.85 Therefore the first face of

the pathfinder of the socialist journalism, Prabatham, came to an end.

In September 1937, Prabhatham started publication again, when the

earlier order passed on it was withdrawn. ‘Prabhatham’ was not only a

Newspaper but also an organizer. The ideology of Congress Socialist Party was

introduced through the Prabhatham. The articles of National Leaders were

translated and published in this paper. It proved to be an agitator as well as an

organiser of CSP. In the real sense, Prabhatham is the forerunner of left wing

82 Kumar, N. Asoka. Press and Freedom Movement in Malabar, p.34, Unpublished Ph D Thesis, University of Kerala, 2005. 83 Namboodiripad, E.M.S. The Communist Party in Kerala: Six Decades of Struggle and Advance, p.18, National Book Centre, New Delhi, 1984. 84 Gopalan, A.K. Ente Jeevithakatha (Mal.), p.128, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 2008. 85 Baskaran, C. Indiayile Communist Pathrangal(Mal.), p.69, Chintha, Thiruvananthapuram, 2002.

42

political journalism in Kerala. The issues from all part of the world were reported

in the paper with the aim of political education to the left wing activists.86

Protests for Amendment of Tenancy Act.

A widespread agitation was organised by Karshaka Sangham demanding

the amendment of Malabar Tenancy Act of 1930.87 It observed 6 November

1938 as the Malabar Tenancy amendment Day’ throughout Malabar and on that

day at various places uniform resolution demanding tenancy amendments was

passed. The All Malabar Karshaka Sangham appointed a committee to enquire

into the tenurial problems and its recommendations were endorsed by the Kerala

Pradesh Congress Committee.88 In December 1938, under the auspices of the

Sangham, two Jathas were organised. The members of the Jathas started from

Karivellur in the north and Kanjicode in the south. Chandroth Kunhiraman Nair

was the leader of the Karivellur Jathas. The Kanjicode Jatha was led by

E.P.Gopalan. Both met at Chevayur in Calicut where the Karshaka Sangham

held its second conference.89 Analyzing the role of Sangham, EMS stated that

what the peasants of Malabar required was not an abstract political programme

86 Karunakaran, P. “60 Years of Deshabhimani,” People’s Democracy, Vol. Xxvi. No. 35, 8th September 2002 87 Radhakrishnan, P. Peasant Struggle, Land Reforms and Social Change, p.97, Sage Publications, New Delhi, 1989.

88 Ibid. 89 Mathrubhumi, 21st December 1938.

43

or rhetoric but an association which can put up fights against the feudal

oppression.90

Kuttikrishna Menon Report and the Dissenting Notes.

In response to popular pressure, T.Prakasam, Revenue Minister of the

Madras government paid a visit to Malabar to acquaint himself with tenant

problems.91 The agrarian situation of the time was so tense that the Rajaji

government was compelled to set up a Tenancy Committee headed by K.

Kuttikrishna Menon to enquire into the entire tenancy problems. Three left wing

leaders of the Congress were included in it.92 Karshaka Sangham was

dissatisfied over the composition of the committee as no representation was

given to the peasant organization. But it took the responsibility to mobilize the

peasants and to give evidence before the committee.93 The Committee submitted

the report in December 1940. The three leftist members submitted dissenting

notes. Though the committee could not come to any unanimous decision, they

felt the necessity of controlling the monopoly of land enjoyed by the landlords

and the urgent need for tenancy legislation. The majority report of the committee

recommended that (1), the fixity of tenure need not be granted to pepper

cultivators; (2) fixity of tenure be given to Verumpattakkar of dry and garden

90 Namboodiripad, E.M.S. “Krishikkar Sangathikkentathu Enthinu Enggane,” E.M.S. inte Sampoorna Krithikkal, Vol.II (Mal.) p.224. 91 The Sangham forwarded to him a copy of the Memorandum sent to the collector of Malabar. See Mathrubhumi, 29th December 1938. 92 Members of the committee were mainly Congress leaders E.M.S. Namboodiripad, Muhammed Abdul Rahman Sahib and E. Kannan were the left wing leaders of the Congress. 93 Mathrubhumi, 8 July 1939.

44

lands; 3) failure to pay the whole or part of the rent should continue to be a

ground of eviction for Verumpattkkars; 4) fair rent should be fixed for

Verumpattakkar; and 5) renewal fee should be reduced and divided into 12 equal

installments in the case of Kanakkars.94

What is noteworthy regarding the report is the dissenting note of E.M.S.

Namboodiripad who opposed the recommendations of the majority. In his

dissenting report EMS highlighted the evils of landlordism and demanded

abolition of landlordism as a precondition to economic planning. According to

him, the appropriation by the land lords of Malabar as a class of Rs.2.5 crores

out of the annual agricultural production of the country without making any

sufficient return to the society was the core of rural backwardness.95 In his

detailed dissenting note EMS thoroughly analyzed all chapters of the report. He

wrote in his note “My colleagues have confirmed themselves to the problems of

immediate importance but have avoided the basic question of land tenure.

Whether land lordism as institutions serves any useful social function or whether

it is parasitic in nature, whether its continuance is a necessity for society at large,

or whether it should be ended with or without compensations, these basic

questions of land tenure have been omitted.”96

Formation of the Communist Party

94 Kunhikrishnan, V. V. Tenancy legislation in Malabar (1880- 1970), p.100, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi, 1993. 95 Namboodiripad, E.M.S. History Society and Land and Relations, Selected Essays, p.154, Left Word, New Delhi, 2010. 96 Ibid. p.150.

45

Early in 1937, four young left wingers – P Krishna Pillai, K Damodaran,

N.C. Sekhar, and E.M.S had secretly formed the Communist Party of India and

had begun working to bring the entire Congress Socialist Party into the CPI.97

The rightists formed a separate organisation under the leadership of K Kelappan

namely Kerala Gandhi Seva Sangham.98 The tenth Kerala state conference held

at Bakkalam in May 1939 witnessed open differences between the right and left

wings of KPCC.99 Following such developments, the leftists of the KPCC

organised a secret meeting at Pinarayi in Tellicherry.100 All the prominent workers

of CSP attended this meeting held in December 1939, and declared themselves

as the members of the Communist Party in Kerala. Thus all the state branches of

the Congress Socialist Party got itself transformed into the Communist Party.101

Anti-repression Day and Subsequent Struggles

The KPCC had decided to observe 15 September, 1940 as ‘Anti-

repression Day throughout Malabar. Karshaka Sangham too decided to conduct

protest marches and meetings. The KPCC meeting held at Chalappuram

decided to observe 15th of September as a protest day to oppose the declaration

97 Jeffrey, Robin. “Matriliny, Marxism, and the Birth of the Communist Party in Kerala, 1930-1940”, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 38, No. 1, (Nov., 1978), pp. 77-98. 98 Mathrubhumi, 14th May 1939 99 Jeffrey, Robin. “Matriliny, Marxism, and the Birth of the Communist Party in Kerala, 1930-1940,” The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 38, No. 1, (Nov., 1978), pp. 77-98. 100 Namboodiripad, E.M.S. Souvenir of the 4th Congress of Communist Party of India. 1956. 101 Balaram, N.E. Keralathile Communist Prastanam: Adyanallukaliloote(Mal.), pp.151-153, Prabatham,

Thiruvananthapuram, 1977.

46

of Viceroy Linlithgow. As soon as this decision came out, the collector of

Malabar, Williams issued prohibitory orders. KPCC secretary K Damodaran

exhorted the people to defy this prohibitory order. There were protests across the

Malabar against these prohibitory orders. At most places the police attempted to

disperse the mob through the use of force.102 There were police firings at various

places like Thalassery, Mattannur and Morazha.

It was decided that in Keechery there will be a meeting of the Karshaka

Sangham too. The police perceived it as an attempt to evade the prohibitory

orders and they decided to counter it. There was a long procession with the

participation of the workers of Aaron mill and peasants of the area. All these

processions were centered at Keechery.103 The Sub inspector Kuttikrishna

Menon handed out the prohibitory orders to the leadership. Then the leadership

decided to shift the venue to Anchampeedika. But they had to face the similar

reaction from the police even at that place. But the people were not ready to

disperse. There was a brutal lathi charge by the police and clash with the crowd

ensued which resulted in the death of two policemen.104 The police registered a

case with 38 accused. KPR Gopalan was condemned to death after prosecution

which resulted in widespread protests across the country.

There were widespread police atrocities in almost all strongholds of Kisan

movement. But the newspapers were not ready to report these incidents. The

102 Mohandas,P. Morazha(Mal.), p.47, Cultural Centre, Morazha, 1993. 103 Anilkumar, A.V. K.P.R.Gopalan(Mal.), p.63-64, Department of Cultural Publications, Government of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram, 2001. 104 Mohandas, P. Morazha (Mal.), p.48, Cultural Centre, Morazha, 1993

47

attempts of P Krishnapillai resulted in Mathrubhumi publishing a small item about

the repression unleashed by the police. Though the correspondent was

immediately reprimanded by the administration, the publication of the news

helped bring a bit of relief to police brutality.105 But very soon brutal repression

was unleashed by the police in places like Morazha, Mattannur and Thalassery.

In Thalasseri of police repression resulted in the death of two peasant

activists Abu and Chathukkutty. Though seen as protest against the prohibitory

orders, the violent clashes with the police had a larger social context and causes

underlying them. The fact that the administration could not address these burning

issues only meant that Morazha, Thalassery and Mattannur were just the

beginning of the larger struggles ahead.

Kayyur

It has been already observed that the Karshaka Sangham achieved its

mass base through combining its struggle for the abolition of landlordism

throughout Malabar with the building up localized resistance against the Jenmis

of a particular area.106 The perils of Second World War aggravated the plight of

the peasants which prompted them to come out more and more openly against

the colonial and landlordist combine. Neeleswaram raja of Chirakkal was one of

the prominent Jenmis of the Hosdurg Taluk.107 The peasants under the

105 Ibid. p.55. 106 Kunhabu, V.V. Kayyoor Samaracharithram (Mal), p.43, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 1983.

107 Kunhabu, V.V. Kayyoor Samaracharithram (Mal), p.61, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 1983.

48

leadership of VV Kunhambu, NG Kamamath, K Madhavan, and M K Kuttan

made preparations to have a long march to the residence of the Neeleswaram

raja and submit a memorandum to him demanding the termination of revenue

collection practices like Vechukaanal, Nuri, Mukkal and Seelakaasu.

Neeleswaram Raja reported to the authorities that the Karshaka Sangham

activists were going to loot his property.108 The police was directed to Kayyur.

The leaders of the Karshaka Sangham VV Kunhambu and TV Kunhiraman were

arrested. K P Vellunga, Choorikkadan Krishnan Nair, Koithattil Chirukandan and

Valappil Raman had arrest warrants issued against them according to Defense of

India Rules.109

March 28, 1941 witnessed strong protest rallies against the arrest of the

leaders. It was organized by the local Communist cell. The demonstrators

shouted slogans against British Rule and landlordism. They raised slogans in

favour of the Soviet Union.110 Further these peasants demanded the release of

remanded peasants and activists in the Morazha and Mattannur cases.111 A

police constable who was said to be a leading figure in the police repression

appeared in an intoxicated condition before the rallies. The peasants insisted him

to hold the red flag and walk in front of the march. He ran off and jumped into a

108.Nayanar, E.K. “Kayyoor,” Porattangalude Ormakal (Mal), p.29, Kannur, Patyam Patana Gaveshana Kendram, Kannur, 2010. 109 Madhavan, K. Oru Gandhiyan Communistinte Ormakal (Mal.), p.128-130, Creative Arts and Cultural Society, Thiruvananthapuram, 2002. 110 Madhavan, K. Oru Gandhiyan Communistinte Ormakal (Mal.), P.128-130, Creative Arts and Cultural Society, Thiruvananthapuram, 2002. 111 Kurup, K. K. N, Peasantry and the Anti-Imperialist Struggles in Kerala Source: Social Scientist, Vol. 16,

No. 9, (Sep., 1988), pp. 35-45.

49

river where he was drowned to death. The establishment was enraged by the

death of its personnel and they registered a case for murder against the peasant

leaders. Four of them, Madathil Appu, Koithattil Chirukandan, Aboobakkar and

Podora Kunhambu Nair were condemned to death.112

MLAs and MLCs of Malabar submitted a clemency petition on behalf the

accused to Madras government. But the government did not relent. Despite the

attempts of the Indian Communist Party and even the British Parliamentarians

who were the members of the British Communist Party, the establishment

insisted on hanging them to death.113 On 29th March 1943, the four peasant

leaders of Kayyur were sent to the gallows.114 Their sacrifice invoked great

admiration from all parts of the country. The All India Kisan Conference which

met at Bhokna decided to observe March 29 as All India Kisan Day.115 The

Kayyur events marked the beginning of the spirited fight of the Indian Peasantry

against the landlordism and colonialism. It differed from all the previous

agitations in its open resistance it offered to imperialism and landlordism.116

112 Kunhanbu, V.V. Kayyoor Samaracharithram (Mal), p.106, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 1983 113 Deshabimani, 28th March 1943. 114 Madhavan, K. Oru Gandhiyan Communistinte Ormakal (Mal.), Creative Arts and Cultural Co-op.Society,TVM,2002. 115 Deshabimani, 18th April 1943 116 Deshabimani, 14th March 1943.

50

Koothali

In Koothali the peasants raised the slogan Chathalum Chethum Koothali(

we will cultivate the land at any cost).117 The 30,000 acre hilly tract spread across

the three Panchyaths of Changaroth, Chakkittappara and Koorachundu. Out of

these 6000 acres were dense forest and the rest of it was suitable for

agriculture.118 The land was under the ownership of Koothali Mooppil Nair and it

used to be given out on lease. By employing the doctrine of lapse, the Madras

government captured the land and the area was called Koothali estate brought

under the control of Malabar District Collector.119 To the great dismay of the

peasants, the practice giving the land on lease came to an end. In 1941 the

Karshakasangham decided to take up this problem actively.120 They have

designed a scheme for growing more food keeping the social good in

perspective. The Karshaka Sangham decided to take up lands which were lying

barren and cultivate them and the produce will be distributed through food

committees and the cost of cultivation will be collected from the public. In order to

implement this scheme, the Karshaka Sangham activists entered the Koothali

area in small units and started cultivating the area. But the authorities employed

a huge police force and the Karshaka Sangham was forced to withdraw. Again

the struggle started in 1946 and there was symbolic success as the activists

117 Kurup, K.K.N. Keralathile Karshika Kalapagal (Mal.), p.120, Mathrubhumi Books, Kozhikode, 2008. 118 Kunhiraman, K.V. (Ed.), Chathalum Chethum Koothali(Mal.) in Keralam Poratathinte Kanalchinthukaliloote, p.63, Purogamana Prasadaka Samithi, Perambra, 2000. 119 Deshabimani 25th February, 1947. 120 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshakasamarangal(Mal.), p.51, Prabatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010.

51

were able to escape from the constant vigil of police and occupy the forest

region.121 Deshabhimani of 25th Feb. 1947 carried a detailed report on this issue.

The struggle getting the land became stronger in 1954 when there was

prolonged struggle in front of the collectorate and this struggle extended for 66

days at the end of which the government reached an agreement with the

peasants according to which 1200 acres of land was handed over to the

peasants on lease.122 The fourth stage of the struggle started in the year 1962.

But the government did not take a favorable attitude towards the protesters. In

1967, during the time of the second EMS ministry, majority of the peasants of

Koothali got ownership rights over their land.123

Deshabhimani

With the decision of the Communist party to participate in the war effort,

the British government lifted the ban on the party.124 CPI began to publish

Deshabhimani, as a weekly, the first issue was published in 6th September

1942.125 After the end of Prabatham there the vaccum created by the closing

down of Prabhatham in left journalism was filled by Deshabhimani. Communist

Party collected money from the people to meet the expenses of its

121 Kunhiraman, K.V.Chathalum Chethum Koothali(Mal.) in Keralam PoratathinteKanalchinthukaliloote. P.63, Purogamana Prasadhaka Vedi, Perambra, 2000 122 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshakasamarangal(Mal.), p.51, Prabatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010.

123 K.V.Kunhiraman, Chathalum Chethum Koothali(Mal.) in Keralam PoratathinteKanalchinthukaliloote. P.63, Purogamana Prasadhaka Vedi, Perambra, 2000.

124 Kurup, M.N. AV.Kunjanbu(Mal.), p.172, Prathiba Books, Mavelikara, 2000. 125 Baskaran, C. Indiayile Communist Pathrangal(Mal.), p.71, Chintha, Thiruvananthapuram, 2002.

52

publication.126 Often Deshabhimani was banned and faced cruel repression from

the colonial rulers. Deshabhimani’s editorial “The call of Gallows” saluted the

Kayyur Martyrs which provoked the British imperialists. The Madras government

took Vindicative measures and ordered the paper to deposit a security of

Rs.1000/-. But Desabhimani easily collected this money from the people. from

18th January 1946 onwards Desabhimani was published as a daily.127 After the

independence also Deshabhimani faced brutal repression from the rulers

because of the pro peasant and workers stand.

Karivellur and Kavumbai

Once the Second World War was over, the communist party decided to

launch a determined struggle against imperialism. According to a resolution

dated 5th august 1946,128 the communists were striving hard to organize the

peasants and workers against imperialism. The pauperized ryots and agricultural

labourers of Malabar, decided on a programme to prevent black marketing and

hoarding and to cultivate barren land for resolving the food crisis.129 The

Karshaka Sanghams of Malabar involved themselves in searching out the

hoarded grain stocks and cultivation of barren lands.

126 Namboodripad, E.M.S. The Communist Party in Kerala: Six Decades of Struggle and Advance, p.71, National Book Centre, New Delhi, 1994. 127 Deshabimani, 30th January 1994. 128 Kurup, K.K.N. Keralathile Karshika Kalapangal (Mal.), p.30, Mathrubhumi, Calicut, 2008. 129 Kannan Nair, P. Munayankunu Vetivepum Athinte Paschatalavum, p.32, in Poratangalute Ormakal,Patyam Patana Gaveshana Kendram, Kannur,2008.

53

The period of Second World War brought unprecedented misery to the

peasants of Malabar. The spread of famine and cholera led to the death of

hundreds of people.130 While the peasants were on a path of agitation. The

Second World War came to a close. The people welcomed the news of the end

of the war with a sigh of relief. At the same time famine inflation, food scarcity,

hoarding and black-marketing plagued the land .Sangham decided to bring an

end to these evils. It decided to open co-operative societies to collect surplus

crops.

The activists of Karshaka Sangham took initiative in providing relief to the

people. Black marketing and hoarding were widespread in the region which

aggravated the crisis.131 The Karshaka Sangham decided to lead the agitations

for capturing the surplus grains captured by the landlords.132 This increased the

popularity and acceptability of the Karshaka Sangham among the masses.

A meeting attended by the activists of Karshaka Sangham , Communist

party and trade unions held at Kozhikode in November 1946 declared the need

for producing more food by cultivating the barren land. The meeting also

exhorted the peasants to ensure that the grains paid as Vaaram should be

measured at the stores before being sent to the granaries of Jenmis. A strong

movement emerged against the corrupt practices of the land lords. On 16th

130 Aisha, R. History of Karshaka Sangham-Its Socio-Economic Impact on Kerala, p.91, Unpublshed Thesis, University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram, 2004. 131 Padmanaban, A. Narayanan, Kavumbayi. Kavumbayi Karshika Kalapam(Mal.), p.57, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvanathapuram, 2010. 132 AV Kunhabu, Kariveloorinte Katha, Published in Porattangalude Ormakal, Patiam Gopalan Padana Gavesana Kendram, Kannur, 2008.

54

December 1946, the workers and peasants and other sections of the population

held a meeting to discuss these matters. The meeting declared that the grains

will not be allowed to be transferred away from Karivellur.133 The activists

guarded the routes through which paddy was to be transported. The landlords

assisted by MSP tried to transfer the paddy and the farmers under the leadership

of A V Kunhambu resisted and the police firing resulted in the death of Thiteel

Kannan and Keeneri Kunhambu. A Case was filed with 141 persons as accused.

66 persons were convicted.134

The events at Karivellur activated the peasants of the whole of Malabar.

The peasants of Irikkoor faced similar problems. The Karshaka Sangham

activists of Irikkoor requested the permission of land lord, Janmi, to cultivate the

land of Kavumbai.135 But the Jenmi was in no mood to oblige. Then they gave

the number of petitions to the ministers and officials of Madras government. After

these, the peasants under the leadership of Karshaka Sangham decided to

occupy the area and cultivate even if they had to face the police. The police

cordoned off the area and assaulted the activists of the Sangham. Thengil Appa

Nambiar, P Kumaran, Alirambilkandi Krishnan, Pulukool Kunjiraman and Manjeri

Govindan lost their lives in the police firing.136 In Neeleswaram, peasants were

133 AV Kunhabu, Kariveloorinte Katha, Published in Porattangalude Ormakal, Patiam Gopalan PadanaGavesana Kendram, Kannur, 2008 134 Kurup, M.N. AV Kunjanbu(Mal.), p.209, Prathiba Books, Mavelikara, 2000.

135 Padmanaban, A. Narayanan, Kavumbayi(Mal.), p.64,Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010. 136 Kunhiraman KV, Keralam-Porattathinte Kanalchinthukaliloode, Purogamana Prasadaka Samithi, Perambra, 2000.

55

denied their traditional right to collect firewood and green manure from the

forests. The peasant activists including women strongly protested and the

agitation ended in the victory of the peasants.

Punnapra Vayalar Struggles

In the year 1938, October 21 the coir factory workers of Alleppey started

an indefinite labour strike demanding rise in wages, release of national leaders

and the need to have a responsible government. The third day of the labour

strike witnessed fierce police brutality against peaceful meetings of the

workers.137 Next morning the workers carried out a march to protest this and the

police fired at the march which resulted in the death of two workers. But none of

these brutalities could prevent the working class from striving for its rights. The

strike extended for 23 days and the labourers could get a hike in wages.138

Theses struggles combined with activism of the socialist movement created a

strong worker peasant alliance in Alleppey.

The year 1946 witnessed the Dewan of Travancore sir CP Ramaswamy

Iyer declaring the ‘American Model’ according to which Travancore would remain

an independent state.139 The trade unions and communist party140 raised the

slogan, “Into the Arabian sea with the American model”. They also decided to

137 Ragavan,Puthuppaly. Viplavasmaranakal (Mal.), p.503, Vol. 1, Sahitya Pravarthaka Cooperative Society, Kottayam, 2009 138 K.V.Sudhakaran, Samarapulakangalil Nirayum Punapra-Vayalar(Mal.)P.56,In Keralam Poratathinte Kanalchinthukaliloote, Purogamana Prasadhaka Samithi, Perambra, 2000. 139 Ragavan, Puthuppaly. Viplavasmaranakal(Mal.), pp.904-908, Vol. 1, Sahitya Pravarthaka Cooperative Sociaty, Kottayam, 2009. 140 Kurup, K.K.N. Keralathile Karshika Kalapagal(Mal.), Mathrubhumi Books, Kozhikode, 2008.

56

organize agitations to ensure the merger of the princely states with Indian

Union.141 Therefore, the workers and peasants of Alappuzha decided to oppose

the American Model and fight the police.142 On 24th October 1946 the workers

and the peasants fought with the army which tried to curb the movement. Firing

took place at Punnapra sea shore and hundreds of workers and peasants lost

their lives.143 The following days there were fierce fight between the army and the

people and more than thousand workers lost their lives.144 This created a new

political awareness across the country. There was a relief committee formed to

help the victims of these struggles in Malabar. The Punnapra Vayalar struggles

served the cause of strengthening the peasant worker unity in the struggle for

agrarian reforms and labour rights. The Punnapra Vayalar struggles gave

inspiration to the workers and peasants of Malabar to carry forward their

combined fight against imperialism and landlordism.

Korom, Onchiyam, Munayamkunnu, Thilenkery and Padikunnu

After the party congress of communist party of India held Calcutta came

out with the Calcutta thesis,145 the communist party was subjected to state

repression. At this juncture, most of the comrades had to go underground.146

141 T.V.K, Sakhavu(Mal.), pp.150-153, Prabhatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2007. 142 Namboodiripad, E.M.S. The Communist Party in Kerala: Six Decades of Struggle and Advance, pp.96-97, National Book Centre, New Delhi, 1984. 143 George, K.C. Punapravayalar(Mal.), pp.11-1120, Prabhatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2007. 144 Ibid. pp.161-174. 145 Thirumumb, T.S. Smaranakal Kavithakal(Mal.), p.95, Kerala Sahitya Akademi, Trichur, 1989. 146 Madhavan, K. Oru Gandhiyan Communistinte Ormakal (Mal.), pp.207-209, Creative Arts and Cultural Society, Thiruvananthapuram, 2002

57

The communist party decided to organize the workers and peasants for an

immediate struggle achieving socialism. Congress governments resorted to the

suppression of the communist movement at any cost. Several places in Kerala

witnessed the attempts by the state machinery to curb the growth of the

communist movement.147 But the Karshaka Sangham could maintain its strong

presence as it had the solid support of the peasants and agricultural labourers.

On 1948 April 10, the Karshaka Sangham at Korom decided to capture

the surplus paddy stocks at the granaries of Mavila Kunhambu Nambiar. On April

12, 1948 they captured the paddy stocks and distributed it to the common

people.148 The police arrested the leaders of the agitation and there was fierce

resistance from the people. The MSP fired at the crowd and one of the agitators

B. Pokkan lost his life on the spot.149 People demanded food grains in fair price

and they confiscated food materials from the granaries of the Jenmis in Payam

village. Police arrested the peasant leaders and tortured them brutally. In

Thillankeri also people boycotted the traditional ritualistic presentations and

organised march to the Jenmi’s house. Police fired upon the peasants. Five

peasant activists died on the spot. At Pazhassi two peasant activists were killed

by the police and the Jenmi goons.150

147 MK. Kelu, Onchiyam Raktasaksikal(Mal.) in Poratangalude Ormakal.P.38, Patyam Patana Gaveshana Kendran, Kannur,2008. 148 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshakasamarangal(Mal.), p.75, Prabatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010. 149 Kunhiraman, Payanur. Korom Raktasakhikal in Poratangalude Ormakal(Mal.),P.109, Patyam Patana Gaveshana Kendran, Kannur, 2008. 150 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshakasamarangal(Mal.), p.75, Prabatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010.

58

In 29th April 1948 a secret meeting of the communist party held at

Onchiyam was tipped off and the very next day MSP searched for the leaders

who were attending the meeting.151 The people tried to resist the arrest of the

activists which resulted in police firing in which eight persons lost their lives.152

The police brutality inside the lock ups took the lives of two more people. Thus

the Onchiyam struggle resulted in the death of 10 people.153 The communists

decided to strike back and they assembled at Munayankunnu with weapons. The

police got information and they attacked the 42 leaders who were inside the

shelter on 1st May 1948.154 The police firing resulted in the death of 6 peasant

leaders.155

In September 1949, the Communist Party was banned. But it succeeded

in mobilizing tenant cultivators and agricultural labourers behind it. They

determined to fight against landlordism.156 Kandakkai Adhikari, the feudal

chieftain prevented Oorada Kannan nair from harvesting his crop. Oorada

Kannan Nair was a prominent worker of the Karshaka Sangham. The activists of

the Karshaka Sangham determined to disobey the landlord and they harvested

151 K.Asokan, Nenchookil Chuvana Onchiyam, in Kerlam Poratathinte Kanalchinthukaliloote, P.129, Purogamana Prasadhaka Samithi, perambra, 2000. 152 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshakasamarangal(Mal.), p.75, Prabatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010. 153 MK. Kelu, Onchiyam Raktasaksikal(Mal.) in Poratangalude Ormakal.P.38, Patyam Patana Gaveshana Kendran, Kannur, 2008. 154 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshakasamarangal(Mal.), p.78, Prabatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010. 155P.KannanNair,MunayankunuVetivepumAthintePaschatalavum,P.32,inPoratangalute Ormakal,Kannur,2008. 156 Kurup, K.K.N. Keralathile Karsheeka Kalapagal, p.110, Mathrubhumi, Kozhikode, 2008.

59

the paddy. The event infuriated the Jenmi who unleashed oppression with the

help of the police. A case was registered and the accused were arrested. They

were taken to police station and sent them to the Police camp. One activist from

the police camp and two leaders from jail were brought to Padikkunnu and killed

by the police.157

India got political independence from the United Kingdom in 1947. But the

struggles of the peasants and agricultural workers continued with the same

intensity. There were a lot of struggles launched by the peasants who were

suffering from the oppression of feudalism. The new government chose to

suppress these struggles mercilessly. There were police firings and many people

lost their lives. The political independence achieved by the Indian Union brought

a sea change as far as the composition and the nature of the agrarian struggles

were concerned. The composition of the support base of the mass movements

became limited to the peasants and agricultural labourers. Communist movement

came to have exclusive leadership of these struggles.

Sooranadu

Oppression was unleashed wherever the communist party became strong.

In Travancore Sooranadu became a stronghold of the Communist movement.

The peasants of the area were largely the tenants of the Thennala family.158 The

157 Malapatam Prabakaran, Patikunuraktasaksikal in Poratangalute Ormakal (Mal), p.121, Patyam Patana

Gaveshana Kendran, Kannur, 2008

158 Ragavan, Puthupally. Viplva Smaranakal(Mal.), p.164, Sahitya Pravarthaka Cooperative Society, Kottayam, 2009.

60

increasing strength of the Communist movement and the unity of the peasants

and workers alarmed the feudal chieftains. There was a public fishing pond which

was used by the agricultural laborers in the lean months. The Jenmis had this

pond taken in auction to prevent the peasants from using it. The Janadhipatya

Yuvajana Vedi and the Communist Party decided to catch fish from the pond.

Police repression followed and the clashes resulted in the death of five police

personnel including a Sub Inspector.159 The police unleashed unprecedented

reign of terror in the area with people being tortured and killed indiscriminately.

Many people lost their lives in the Sooranadu incident. 160

Salem Police Firing

Some of the leaders imprisoned in connection with the peasant struggles

of 1946 were shot at Salem on 11 February, 1950.161 There were 220 peasant

workers and communist party activists in Jail. Twenty two peasant activists died

in the police firing.162 The Madras government instructed the Malabar Special

police to root out the Communist and Kisan workers movements.

Kerala Karshaka Sangham.

In 1956, Malabar Kisan Sangham was reorganized and renamed as

159 Ragavan, Puthupally. Viplva Smaranakal (Mal.), p.164, Sahitya Pravarthaka Cooperative Society, Kottayam,2009. 160 Basi,Thopil. Olivile Ormakal (Mal.), p.42, Prabatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2009. 161 Krup, K.K.N. Keralathile Karsheeka Kalapangal(Mal.), p.117, Mathrubhumi Books, Kozhikode, Calicut, 2008. 162 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshaka Samarangal(Mal.), p.84, Prabhatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010.

61

Kerala Karshaka Sangham. The Kerala Karshaka Sangham had its first state

convention at Shorannur in December 1956, soon after the linguistic

reorganization of the state of Kerala.163 Kerala Karshaka Sangham adopted

several resolutions in December 1956 which demanded ceiling on land holdings,

distribution of waste lands to the landless, stoppage of all evictions and writing off

of all agricultural debts.164

Krishikkaran

Krishikkaran was the mouthpiece of Malabar Karshaka Sangham with KA

Keraleeyan as its editor. Later this weekly became the organ of Kerala Karshaka

Sangham. Krishikkaran was in publication from 1952 to 1970165 and it served as

a tool of communication for the activists of Karshakasangham, giving them

information regarding the activities of the Sangham and the developments in the

land reform and the various measures taken by the government.

Agricultural Workers

The agricultural workers in Kerala faced various difficulties including caste

oppression. Majority of them hailed from the casteless communities. A movement

for agricultural workers took birth and functioned as part of the peasant

movement of Kerala in the initial stages. The story was similar in other parts of

the country as well. In Malabar, the agricultural workers movement came up at a

163 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshaka samarangal, p.96, Prabhatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010. 164 Oommen, T. K. Agrarian Legislations and Movement a Source of Change, the case of Kerala, Economic and Political Weekly, 4 ,oct.1975, pp 1571-84. 165 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshaka Samarangal, p.89, Prabhatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010.

62

later period than in Travancore. The most significant development in the history

of agricultural worker’s movement in Kuttanad is the origin and growth of

agricultural workers’ union at Kuttanad.166 The high investment which was

required to cultivate in the Kayal fields of Kuttanad, produced a class of capitalist

agriculturists and the paid wage labourers. This particular agrarian relations and

the contact with the militant trade union activists of Alappuzha led to the early

formation of a strong agricultural workers movement in this region.167

Against Eviction

The Kisan Sabha units all over the country valiantly fought against eviction

drive. They organised signature campaigns against eviction in different parts of

India including Malabar. In Malabar area a Kisan Jatha was organised in 1954,

which toured all the Taluk centres collecting signatures finally reached Madras

hundreds of miles away to present a petition. In Travancore and Cochin State

also a Jatha was conducted in 1955 which lasted for 17 days, covering 200

miles. The first general elections of 1957 saw the Communist Party of India

acquiring power in the state of Kerala. The government rode on the back of the

popular demand for agrarian reforms.168 The Karshaka Sangham played a very

crucial part in bringing this government to power. The new government of the

Communist Party started its day in the office by the promulgation of Stay of

166 George, K.C. Punapravayalar(Mal.), p.42, Prahatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2007. 167 Isaac, T.M. Thomas. Bhooparishkaranam Eni Enthu? (Mal), p.41, Chintha Publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 2008. 168 Radhakrishnan, P. Peasant Struggle, Land Reforms and Social Change, Malabar1836-1982, p.111, New Delhi,1989.

63

Eviction Ordinance169. In fact it was one of the first official documents to be

signed by the Chief Minister. The Benefit of the ordinance was enjoyed by all the

tenants who were in the shadow of eviction by the Jenmis who were anticipating

radical reform in the land relations. The hutment dwellers were also the

beneficiaries of this act. They could keep in possession the piece of land on

which they were staying for years. This was a unique and courageous step

adopted by the government. It helped the tenants to be aware of their rights and

they strongly resisted the attempts of Jenmis to evict them.

Kerala Agrarian Relations Bill 1957

The KARB contained the following provisions which were epoch making.

The ceiling of land was fixed at 15 acres per family. It granted fixity of tenure to

all types of land. There were provisions restricting the resumption of land by

owners170. The tenants were given the right to purchase the lands cultivated by

them subject to ceiling limits, by paying 16 times of the fair rent fixed under the

Bill or 12 times of the contract rent 16 annual installments171. The bill evoked

widespread protests among the elite land owning sections of the society. The

upper castes, the church and all vested interest groups fiercely opposed the bill.

The Karshaka Sangham welcomed the long awaited legislation, but the

169 Pothuval, A.K. Keralathile Karshaka Samarangal(Mal.), p.98, Prabhatham, Thiruvananthapuram, 2010. 170 K.A.R.B, 1957, Kerala secretariat. 171 Ibid.

64

reactionary elements started an agitation which they called Liberation Struggle

against the Government.172

Supporting this bill in the assembly, the peasant leader KPR Gopalan

stated, “We should remember that we are involved in the enactment of a bill

which will be written in golden letters in the history of India. We have found the

Faispur resolution and Karachi resolution of Congress on Paper. But nothing has

been implemented… If any state ruled by congress took any initiative in this

regard, the Chief Minister of that particular state has lost his chief minister

ship”.173

Struggle against Land Reforms

It is not surprising that the same fate was awaiting the communist

government as well. The government had to face opposition from all vested

interests who launched a collective attack against its progressive policies like

land reforms174, attempts to bring social control in education etc.175 The entire

media and the reactionary elements of the state politics combined with some left

forces like RSP and PSP launched a concerted struggle on 12 June, 1959 to

remove the EMS ministry from power so that these interventions can be

172 Deshabhimani, 1st November 1958. 173 Minutes of the legislative assembli,Kerala, December,1957. 174 Radhakrishnan, P. Peasant Struggle Land Reforms and Social Change, Malabar1836-1982, p.122, New Delhi, 1989. 175 Dashabimani, 25th July 1959.

65

nullified.176 The Congress government at the centre dismissed the EMS ministry

citing law and order problems and breakdown of constitutional machinery.177

Dilution through Legislature

The Congress and PSP coalition came to power after the EMS

government passed the Kerala Agrarian Relations Act 1960.178 It eroded what

was progressive in the KARB. In the amended bill there was no provision for the

rehabilitation of tenants who were evicted after the formation of Kerala. This

legalized the evictions by the land lords. There was no ceiling for plantation

sector and the agricultural land contiguous with the plantations were also given

exemption and Kudikidappu rights were specifically prohibited in plantation

areas.179 Lands belonging to the charitable institutions and temples were

excluded from ceiling limits. The act faced so many legal hurdles as it was

declared null and void by the courts for most of the area under the Ryotwari

system. The operationalisation of the act thus got terminated. After this, Kerala

Land Reforms Act was formulated; but here also the government did not show

genuine interest to implement the Kerala Land Reforms Act for the benefit of the

peasants.

176 Issac,T.M.Thomas. Vimochana Samarathinte Kanapurangal(Mal), p.180-187, Thiruvananthapuram, 2008. 177 Deshabimani, 1st August 1959. 178 Kearala Agrarian Relation Act, 1960, Kerala Secretariat. 179 Deshabimani, 20th October 1960, also see Deshabimani 10th January 1961.

66

Amaravati Agitation 1961

The settlers in Udumpanchola who encroached forest land belonging to

the hydro electric project of Idukki were evicted from the area and they were

asked to move to the Amaravati forests lying near Kumili, Idukki. The Karshaka

Sangham under the leadership of A K Gopalan started a successful agitation to

rehabilitate the people. Father Vadakkan also participated in the movement.

The eviction from Ayyappankovil started from may 2nd 1961. A police

station and a magistrate court were set up for the purpose. The policemen

demolished the hutments and burned them down. Within two weeks, more than

1500 families were evicted from Ayyappan kovil.180 The area extended for around

8000 acres with more than 10000 residents. A.K. Gopalan, the leader of

Karshaka Sangham declared that he would start his indefinite hunger strike at

Amaravati from 6th June 1961. The Indefinite hunger strike by A.K. Gopalan

attracted the attention of all sections of the people across the country.181 Leaders

including K. Kelappan, took favourable attitude towards A.K. Gopalan. The

government of the times which had initially taken a squarely negative attitude to

the struggle had to change its approach. The government conceded to the

demand of allotting 3 acres of land to each family. Distribution of certain amount

of rice freely through the ration shops, replacement of the barren land by fertile

one, a temporary loan of 100 rupees and the free text books for children were

some of the demands which were conceded by the government. The hegemony

180 Desahabimani, 4th may 1961. 181 Deashabimani, 8 June 1961.

67

of Karshaka Sangham and its effectiveness in addressing peasant problems was

clear once again.

Kottiyoor, Churuli-Keerithode Anti-eviction Struggles.

The Kottiyoor Devaswam land was taken on lease by Mannathu

Padmanabhan through a Melcharthu for 99 years. The government declared that

the government had no objection to the eviction of encroachers on the

Devaswam land. This stance alarmed the peasants of Kottiyoor. Peasants

started agitations against this. Many leaders including AK Gopalan were arrested

for the participation in the movement. The peasants under the leadership of AK

Gopalan put up a heroic resistance and the peasants won the struggle.182

November–December of 1963 witnessed the Churuli Keerithode agitations

when 4000 people were evicted in the name of forest conservation. A.K.

Gopalan started a hunger strike.183 The newspapers of Kerala who favoured the

government stance wrote editorials about the need for preservation of forests. It

is necessary to protect the forests but for whom? asked A.K. Gopalan who was

the leader of the agitation. “As I have stated earlier even newspapers were not

allowed to enter the area. Once the news about the strike came out there were

protest movements in various parts of Kottayam”,184 A.K. Gopalan says. The

Government tried to defeat the struggle through various means. The masses

182 Gopalan, A. K. Manninu Vendi (Mal.), p.54, Chintha publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 2008. 183 Ibid. p.80. 184 Ibid.

68

particularly the evictees resisted. A.K. Gopalan withdrew the agitation at the

instance of E.M.S on behalf of the CPI (M).185 The Communist Government

which came to power in 1967 finally addressed the grievances of the evictees.

Abolition of Landlordism

The widespread demand for agrarian reforms forced the government to

bring another legislation dealing with land reforms. But the bill which was passed

an extremely diluted version of the former legislations.186 It gave no respite to the

tenant and permanently affected the process of land reforms. Kerala Land

Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1969 included the provision for abolition of both

landlordism and tenancy in Kerala. It provided hutment dwellers the option to

purchase his homestead from the land owners on easy terms and conferred the

ownership of land under tenancy to the cultivating tenants. It limited ceiling to 20

acres per family.187

A conference which was held at Alappuzha on Dec.14, 1969 with the

participation of peasants and agricultural labourers declared that the Kerala Land

Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1969 passed by the United front government will be

deemed as (emphasis added) being passed on 1st January 1970 and declared

that the rights over the land will be forcibly acquired.188 As part of this, large

185 Gopalan, A. K. Manninu Vendi (Mal.), p.80, Chintha publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 2008. 186 Radhakrishnan, P. Peasant Struggle Land Reforms and Social Change, Malabar1836-1982, p.143, New Delhi, 1989. 187 Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1969, Kerala Secretariat. 188 Panikkotti, M.K. Keralathile Karshaka Thozhilalikal Innale Innu Nale(Mal.), P.69-70, Thiruvananthapuram,2008.

69

scale propaganda was unleashed by the leadership of Kerala Karshaka

Sangham and Kerala State Karshaka Thozhilali Union.189 From 1st January 1970

tenants started to occupy land that duly belonged to them and they stopped

paying the rent. This direct struggle launched by Karshaka Sangham and

Karshaka Thozhilali union was a notable event in the history of peasant and

agricultural workers movement.

The Government that came to power after the resignation of the United

Front government tried to dilute the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms

(Amendment) Act, 1969, with some provisions in favour of the land owners.190

The 9th state conference of the Kerala Karshaka Sangham took place at

Kozhikode and this conference exhorted 15th September to be observed as Anti

Eviction Day. In October 1970, the conference of Agricultural workers union was

held at Alappuzha. The conference demanded the representation of agricultural

labourers in the Surplus Land Committees. The Excess Land Grab Agitation was

initiated on 25th March 1972 for the strict implementation of ceiling measures in

the state by capturing the surplus land in selected locations.191 The land grabs

agitation aroused great interest among the landless peasants. The agitation

served as an accelerator in the implementation of the act.

189 Gopalan, A. K. Manninu Vendi (Mal.), p.92, Chintha publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 2008. 190 Deshabhimani, 1st January 1970. 191 Gopalan, A. K., Manninu Vendi (Mal.), p.129, Chintha publishers, Thiruvananthapuram, 2008 .

70

Thus after a long drawn out struggle, the peasant movement of Kerala

was successful in the legal abolition of landlordism and they were able to launch

struggle to enforce the implementation of this legal provisions. This has brought a

sea change not only in the agrarian relations of Kerala but also in the life of the

Kerala society as a whole. It accentuated the democratisation of the society and

helped advance the struggle against social and economic injustices. As we have

seen in this chapter, the struggle of the peasantry could succeed as it touched

every sphere of life in the Kerala society. Media and literature played a crucial

part in this struggle for change and social justice. The following chapters will be

examining that role in more detail.